Comments

I enjoyed this episode a lot, speaking as a hardcore atheist. I always think of religious people as the ones who are done searching and think they have all the answers, whereas scientists and materialists are the ones always looking for new insights. But this episode showed me the opposite point of view, how a spiritual person could see the materialist as the one who’s done searching and thinks he has it all figured out. Not really changing my mind about anything but it’s interesting to think about, always good to get different perspectives.

This is a great interview and I am really grateful it exists. My only regret is how much you talk, Pete, and interject things about yourself — as well as how often you seem to talk over your guest before he’s finished developing the entire thread of what he was in the process of saying. Even when you’re listening you’re still punctuating the conversation with frequent exclamations that, while passionate, can be distracting. It might be worth listening to the interview again to see if there’s anything to what I’m perceiving about the way this interview unfolds and perhaps seeing if it might be worth doing more listening in the future. When you get a really awake guest like Richard, he’s going to be comfortable rolling with the flow of things regardless of how much wisdom he gets or doesn’t get to share. That said, thank you so much for making this happen and for bringing him and his work to my attention

Thank you for this podcast! I’m in the midst of a big change and this was exactly what I needed when I needed it. I’m moving from Oklahoma to Seattle and leaving my fundamentalist family behind and this dialogue helped me find the right words and mindset to make the announcement easier for everyone. Thank you, Pete, for returning what you’ve been given.

Pete, you are an enneagram type six; The Loyalist. I am literally 100% certain about this diagnosis.

The loyalist navigates life by collecting people they trust, relying on their input when making decisions. They find it very difficult to be decisive in isolation. They feel a strong desire for something larger than themselves that they can attach to as a source of meaning and security.

The loyalist will often oscillate between phobic and counter-phobic behaviours. They will feel like they’re being too submissive and accommodating, then respond by being combative and independent, then worry that they’ve gone too far and destroyed their own security. They will freak out about not being active enough, then respond by over-committing and then freaking out about that.

The loyalist invariably experiences anxiety. They are keenly aware of when their behaviour deviates from what is expected, and have a deep existential struggle deciding whether or not to conform to external standards. They want to be trusted and to trust others, yet constantly test others to allay their own suspicions. They want the protection of others, yet fear it.

(Although the two appear on the surface to be very different, I would diagnose Pete Holmes as a primarily phobic six, and Marc Maron as a primarily counter-phobic six.)

Pete and Itsbecca get Richard! It takes a nonjudgmental person with an open mind who enjoys a life full of love and acceptance not hatred and negative criticizing of those different from us. Richard is a “Rock Star”

I love waking up to some long-debunked religious apologism and rambling, incoheent “spiritualsim” in the morning. Apparently Pete will agree with literally anything that sounds poetic or self-contradictory and think anything of value has been learned. Yawn.

Please tag the FORB guests in the titles in the future so I can skip these boring horse shit episodes with idiotic guests. At least the spiritual comedian guests provide some funny before they get boring and stupid.

Did you look at the description? Listen to the intro? Or hell, did you look at the picture? He has the robes, the hair, you could practically drop him right into Disney’s Robin Hood and not a single child would notice.

You’re certainly welcome to dislike any episode, but the argument that there wasn’t significant warning of the incoming content… well that’s just absurd.

How wonderful! My mind is so much lighter after listening to this. I’ve long since separated from the canon of my religious upbringing, but maturing showed me I didn’t want that to be a division between me and my friends and family. So the struggle now is love, acceptance and generally navigating the tricky waters of interfacing with them in conversations where our beliefs clash. I find having discussions within the framework of Christianity is a much easier way to relate, because I don’t have any desire to separate someone from their faith.

I was so grateful to hear him speak about the focus of bodily sins being a juvenile approach to religion. This hit on one of the things that has bothered me since I was very, very young. I remember a Samoan woman visiting our church with extensive tattooing, obviously part of her culture. There was so much whispering and gossiping about her, and I remember, even as child, just feeling sick to my stomach about it. How could they possibly believe speaking such hate and judgment against a wonderful faithful woman could be acceptable; yet, somehow her following her cultures traditions (presumably before joining the church even) was not acceptable.

Church goers often spend so much time policing those around them under the guise of creating a better church environment, when really they need to focus growing religion in their own hearts, then it will never matter what your surroundings are.

Wow I can relate to everything you just said. I often find myself “plugging in” my concepts for the words I hear at Mass…knowing full well that language limits us. Thank you for sharing. I know I’m not alone

Richard’s comments on duality at the beginning of the podcast, specifically regarding binary thinking, remind me of Pete’s”fuck vanilla” comedy touchstone. Juxtaposing two things; comparing and contrasting through a sharply focused lens; unflinchingly assigning binary values to each; eviscerating one and elevating the other; based on our innate responses, the parts of our brain that respond to trust and leadership must light up like a Christmas tree when we witness these actions. they tempt us to throw away our own analyses – even our desire to formulate our own analyses – and simply accept the interpretations presented to us. Decisiveness and confidence seem to bypass our reasoning filter in the same way a hacker bypasses a password screen. Interesting.
They also remind me of the story of Jesus and Barabbas.